subway delay presentation

19
NYCT Subway Performance Joseph Leader, Senior VP, Subways Peter Cafiero, Chief, Operations Planning May 2015

Upload: johnd7463

Post on 18-Dec-2015

45.578 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

Presented in May 2015 at a meeting of the MTA's Transit Committee.

TRANSCRIPT

  • NYCT Subway Performance

    Joseph Leader, Senior VP, Subways

    Peter Cafiero, Chief, Operations Planning

    May 2015

  • Today, Subway performance is primarily challenged by growing

    ridership, ongoing maintenance needs & unplanned events

    1

    Ridership is growing in peak and off-peak periods

    Critical maintenance needs are growing and work often performed under train

    traffic

    Unplanned events do occur (e.g., power outages, water main breaks, signal

    trouble) and also have a significant impact

    on service

    2014 Delays by Cause*

    Planned Work26%

    Unplanned Work22%

    Crowding, Police, Sick Customer, etc.

    40%

    Other12%

    *Delays February 2014-January 2015

  • Incidents versus Delays: Impact of a given incident can vary widely by

    time, line and location

    2

    168th St, 9:09 PM, 3/23/15, 22 minute

    duration

    72nd St, 4:35 PM, 11/4/14, 10 minute

    duration

    Example: Sick Customer Incident Delayed Trains(Number of trains rerouted or made 5 minutes late to the terminal by the incident)

    A similar incident has a smaller

    impact on a less busy line...

    14 Trains Delayed

    50th St, 6:08 PM, 7/29/14, 10 minute duration

    72 Trains Delayed

    and even less impact during the off peak.

    3 Trains Delayed

  • Incidents vary in frequency and magnitude of impact

    3

    2014 Weekday Incidents, Major Categories

    Incident DescriptionNo. of

    Incidents

    No. of Delays

    (avg. per Incident)

    Unplanned Work

    Water Condition & Water Main Break 36 59

    Track Conditions 548 33

    Fire/Smoke Conditions 419 22

    Signal Conditions 2,370 17

    Door closing trouble (often crowding-related) 2,324 5

    Planned Work 11,334 10

    Crowding, Police, Sick Customers, etc 29,734 6

  • Ridership is growing at all hours of the day and has exceeded 2008

    levels in all hours

    4

    -

    100,000

    200,000

    300,000

    400,000

    500,000

    600,000

    12 AM- 1 AM

    1 AM -2 AM

    2 AM -3 AM

    3 AM -4 AM

    4 AM -5 AM

    5 AM -6 AM

    6 AM -7 AM

    7 AM -8 AM

    8 AM -9 AM

    9 AM -10 AM

    10 AM-11 AM

    11 AM-12 PM

    12 PM- 1 PM

    1 PM -2 PM

    2 PM -3 PM

    3 PM -4 PM

    4 PM -5 PM

    5 PM -6 PM

    6 PM -7 PM

    7 PM -8 PM

    8 PM -9 PM

    9 PM -10 PM

    10 PM-11 PM

    11 PM-12 AM

    Weekday Subway Ridership by Hour

    2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

    Source: OMB linked trips

  • 15 out of 20 lines are at peak track capacity, including ten lines

    already at track and train (passenger carrying) capacity

    5

    Subway Track Capacity by Line - AM Peak Hour (Peak Direction)

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    50%

    60%

    70%

    80%

    90%

    100%

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C D E F G J Z L M N Q R

    Capacity measured at the Peak Load Point, where trains carry the heaviest load in the peak hour

    Peak Load Point for busiest direction on each line shown above

    Colors indicate whether additional capacity is available

    Red constrained in both track and train capacity (10 lines)

    Yellow passenger capacity on existing trains but no track capacity to run more trains (5 lines)

    Green both track and train capacity available (5 lines)

    10

    3 S

    t

    72

    St

    72

    St

    86

    St

    86

    St

    68

    St

    Exp

    W

    oodsid

    e / L

    oca

    l

    40

    St

    Ja

    y S

    t

    7 A

    v (

    Bro

    okly

    n)

    Ja

    y S

    t

    36

    St

    Roo

    se

    ve

    lt A

    v

    Roo

    se

    ve

    lt Isla

    nd

    Gre

    en

    poin

    t A

    v

    Ma

    rcy A

    v

    Be

    dfo

    rd A

    v

    Elm

    hu

    rst A

    v

    Qu

    ee

    ns P

    laza

    Qu

    ee

    nsboro

    Pla

    za

    Qu

    ee

    nsboro

    Pla

    za

  • Heavy ridership affects system performance closely correlated with delays

    6

    500

    1,000

    1,500

    2,000

    2,500

    3,000

    3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 5,000,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 6,500,000

    Dela

    ys P

    er

    Weekd

    ay

    Weekday Ridership

    December 2014 Weekday Delays vs. Ridership

    Close to Average

    Daily Ridership

  • We complete critical maintenance under traffic

    We have increased the frequency of infrastructure, track and signal inspections

    Every weekday, we average 400 work sites on the right of way, 150 of which occur between 9am and 4pm

    75% of the work sites are for signals and track maintenance / repairs

    We work in approximately 4-5 locations per line during off-peak periods

    Amidst ridership challenges, planned work on the right of way is

    essential to maintain a State of Good Repair

    7

    In 2003, 3,900 delayed trains were due to planned work (6%).

    In 2014, 113,000 delayed trains were due to planned work (26%).

  • Enhanced worker protection systems slow trains to protect workers

    on tracks

    Slow speeds (10 mph) past work sites ensure worker safety (flagging), but lower capacity

    Flagging rule enhancements since 2003 have lengthened slow speed zones and have added slow speed protection on adjacent tracks

    Current rules Total advance warning zone: 1,150ft

    150 ft 1,000 ft720 ft

    Current rules Clear at 720ft

    8

    Even one small work zone requires more than 1/3 of a mile of slow train speed

    A typical slow speed zone reduces track capacity from 28 to 18 trains per track per hour

  • Service Improvement Plan

    9

  • Service Delivery efforts focus on reliable, evenly-spaced service, as

    measured by Wait Assessment

    Wait assessment is the percent of intervals between

    trains that are not more than scheduled interval +25%,

    based on multiple observations in each trip

    Wait assessment is a better measure of customer

    service than delays or OTP because:

    Unlike commuter rail, the vast majority of our riders are headway focused, not schedule

    focused

    Most customers ride only a portion of the line and do not ride terminal to terminal

    WA is calculated along each line and provides a more comprehensive picture of customer

    experience

    10

  • A Subway Delay Story

    11

  • Scheduled Service

    Efforts to maintain evenness improve customer service, at the

    expense of OTP

    12

    Diagram depicts train positions as they pass stations (vertical) over time (horizontal)

    6 6

    Time

    Po

    sitio

    n a

    lon

    g tra

    ins

    jou

    rne

    y

  • Efforts to maintain evenness improve customer service, at the

    expense of OTP

    13Only select dwells shown

    Diagram depicts train positions as they pass stations (vertical) over time (horizontal)

    Each plotted point represents the time that a train arrived in a station

    Even train spacing is represented by parallel, evenly spaced string lines

    Large spaces and nonparallel lines indicate uneven spacing, possibly due to incidents

    6 6 Southbound 6 service, 12/22/14

    Trains are mostly

    evenly spacedSpacing is uneven

    There are irregular gaps in

    service

    Southbound arrived

    14th Street-Union Square

    at 8:26 AM

    6

  • Efforts to maintain evenness improve customer service, at the

    expense of OTP (cont.)

    14

    Train had an

    incident at 125th

    Street causing

    a 13 minute

    gap in service

    Only select dwells shown6 6 Southbound 6 service, 12/22/14

    Train dispatchers employ strategies to regulate train spacing, especially around an incident

    Ahead of a delayed train, trains may be held to ensure a large gap in service does not follow

    Once the incident has been cleared, trains may be instructed to skip stops to catch up and lessen train bunching

    Service management actions typically help Wait Assessment, often at the expense of OTP

    Trains ahead were held in

    station to close the gap

    from in front

    The "incident train" and one train

    behind it were instructed to skip

    stations (no station stop shown) to

    catch up and clear train congestion

    Additional Delays due

    to incident and service

    actions

    Holding helped some

    intervals meet Wait

    Assessment standard

  • Subway Schedules - First comprehensive revision since 1990s, when

    weekday ridership was equivalent to current Saturday ridership

    1515

    We have accelerated a thorough review of weekday schedules, will be fully implemented in 2015

    Line-by-line, we are:

    Updating running times

    Providing terminal recovery times for arriving trains and crews to make return trips

    Adjusting schedules to better manage:

    Merges and terminal operations

    Even headways

    Adjustments for off-peak planned work

    Will expand to weekend schedules in 2016

  • 2014 Delays*

    Different lines are impacted by different factors, service and incident

    management efforts vary by line

    13% 11% 12%

    52%

    28%

    40%

    19%

    26%

    22%

    16%

    35%

    26%

    Planned Work

    Unplanned Work

    Crowding, Police,

    Sick Customers, etc.

    System

    444,897100%

    Other

    A Division

    223,794

    B Division

    221,103

    16*Delays February 2014-January 2015

  • We are launching initiatives to target primary challenges on specific lines,

    based on wait assessment performance

    Targeted Lines Based on Wait Assessment Decline:

    Crowding and Service Management

    Focus service management efforts on maintaining evenness of service (wait assessment)

    Reduce dwell times at problematic locations (initial focus is primarily on 6 line)

    Additional platform controllers, step aside boxes, and revising door announcements to speed door closing

    Monitor platform crowding conditions via cameras and staged personnel and respond to real-time conditions

    Improve communications during disruptions

    Formalize partnership with NYPD to assist with platform metering during incident

    17

    Planned Work

    Unplanned Work

    Crowding, Police,

    Sick Customers, etc.

    Other

    System Delays

  • Targeted Lines Based on Wait Assessment Decline:

    Incident Prevention

    Targeting highest incident locations and enhancing inspections

    Increased ultrasonic testing

    Aggressive Continuous Welded Rail installation

    Incident Response

    CAT Teams: Signals, Track and Third Rail teams strategically deployed for quick response

    Lex Line Signals Coverage: signal staff staged along Lexington Corridor for accelerated response to incidents

    Additional multi-discipline response personnel

    Improved Coordination of Planned Work to Minimize Impact

    Consolidate work planning to create multi-discipline work zones and decrease impact of planned work on service; targeting Lexington corridor for initial pilot implementation

    18

    We are launching initiatives to target primary challenges on specific lines,

    based on wait assessment performance

    Planned Work

    Unplanned Work

    Crowding, Police,

    Sick Customers, etc.

    Other

    System Delays